Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamlesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 April, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1 CRA-2498-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 2498 of 2025
(KAMLESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 23-04-2025
Shri Akhand Pratap Singh Chauhan- Advocate for appellant.
Shri Harish Sharma- Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Heard on I.A. No.6156/2025, first application under Section 389(1) of
Cr.P.C/430 (1) of BNSS, 2023 filed on behalf of appellant- Kamlesh for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
2. Present appellant stands convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 376 read with Section 109 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 20 years'
RI with fine of Rs.5,000/-, under Section 120-B of IPC and sentenced to
undergo 20 years' RI with fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 506 Part II of
IPC and sentenced to undergo 01 year's RI with fine of Rs.500/- with default
stipulation v i d e judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
25.02.2025 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Morena (M.P.) in
S.T.No.74/2024.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the trial
Court erred in convicting the present appellant and awarding jail sentence. It
is further submitted that allegations are peculiar in nature. Sufficient material
contradictions exist in the testimony of prosecutrix, who happens to be wife
of present appellant. They were sharing discordant note in their domestic
relationship. Therefore, her version of course of events changed from time to
time. In the written complaint filed at the instance of mother of prosecutrix,
2 CRA-2498-2025
one person was involved in commission of offence of rape, but in statement
of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 of CrPC, two persons were
incorporated. Later on, in her examination-in-chief, she mentioned different
versions and refers the fact that she was mostly living with her mother rather
than present appellant. She admits that she was not happily married. Learned
counsel for appellant also raised the point regarding DNA and delayed FIR.
Appellant has good case on merits and final hearing of appeal would take
some time. He undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by
this Court. Under such circumstances, learned counsel prays for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for
dismissal of the application.
5. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
parties, this Court intends to allow the I.A. No.6156/2025, application for
suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant subject to furnish bail bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with one solvent
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Appellant shall
appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court on 21/07/2025 and on all
other subsequent dates as may be fixed by the Office for appearance, then he
shall be released on bail and execution of his jail sentence is suspended till
disposal of this appeal, subject to deposit of fine amount.
6. It is further directed that appellants shall not be a source of
embarrassment and harassment to the complainant in any manner and they
shall not move in the vicinity of the complainant and shall not try to contact
3 CRA-2498-2025
the complainant party by any mode, otherwise, benefit of suspension of
sentence and bail shall automatically stands cancelled.
7. Accordingly, I.A. No.6156/2025 stands allowed and disposed of.
8. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
information and necessary compliance.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
*AVI*
